Web Search powered by YAHOO! SEARCH
05.12.2008 12:00 pm

Harris formally responds to Blunt’s records request

  • Email this
  • Print this

Several years from now, some enterprising reporter is going to be listening to war tales about this whole e-mail tiff that’s been ruffling feathers lately. The reporter is going to get an idea to file a new sunshine request, asking for all related documents, from each of the story’s principal actors. That reporter is going to have a lot to wade through.

Last Friday, another document was added to the heap. It’s a formal response from Rep. Jeff Harris, D-Columbia, to a request from Gov. Matt Blunt’s office for Harris’ e-mail records dating to 2003.

In the letter, which was hand-delivered to Trish Vincent, Blunt’s chief of staff, Harris mentions a longstanding House opinion that individual members are not public bodies themselves, and thus do not fall under the Sunshine Law.

“Without addressing whether that position is correct, I am nevertheless willing to produce the records that are responsive to your request,” the letter reads.

Vincent’s original missive contained a phrase alluding to the House opinion: “I am confident that you will agree the act applies to you.”

Harris says the request would encompass roughly 70,000 pages of documents and 5,000 e-mails. He says the copying fees and labor costs would run about $10,000.

He ends the letter with, “If you are inclined to narrow your request for more specific records, it would reduce substantially the time and cost of responding to your request.”

Vincent’s request sought the following:

-Every e-mail sent to or from the e-mail address “jeff.harris@house.mo.gov” since January 2003;
-Copies of all e-mail back-up tapes or other storage mechanism for the e-mail address “jeff.harris@house.mo.gov” since January 2003;
-Every document created on a state of Missouri owned computer assigned to Rep. Jeff Harris or a member of his staff since January 2003; and
-Every document received by Rep. Jeff Harris or a member of his staff pursuant to law or in connection with their official duties since January 2003.

7 comments

Comments are closed.

LMAO!!!

Can we just file this under the category of “I told you so”???

— Jim (the republican)
2:24 pm May 12th, 2008

Who told who what, Jim? Looks like Harris said he’ll hand everything over. Blunt’s bluff has been called. Does Blunt actually want the documents? That’s his call, but the stuff is his if he wants it.

Chortle. Chortle. Chortle.

— shecky
4:48 pm May 12th, 2008

jim, it’ll be a cold day in hades before Matt “stonewall” Blunt comes up with any e-mails from his early days of handing over the reins of government to the lobbyists represented by his family and the rest of the GOP’s contributors.

Some would likely have high executive office folks go to jail, others would put the Republican party out of business in Missouri for the next century.

The controversy isn’t going away, it’ll be just like the merry-go-round of corruption under former GOP AG Bill Webster.

I think the prosecutor for Cole County needs to convene a grand jury and get some real results.

— Tim Hogan
5:12 pm May 12th, 2008

As with the promise, “All darkness will come to light” always just a matter of time. And, there’s a whole lotta darkness there that will be exposed by the light. In fact, many are praying for light upon these hidden evils.

Now, when is Blunt planning on handing over what has been requested? The response of the governor to seek these thing from Harris is extremely childish and should be embarrassing to him, but obviously is not. Scary, that enough of us, including myself did not know his true character before we placed him in office.

— D. Walker
12:55 am May 13th, 2008

I’ve never given the governor a pass on this issue … I merely said that, to request such information is ridiculous, time consuming and costly.

I think that Blunt’s request of Harris was merely to point out that fact. Maybe Harris will quit whining about it and start looking at some other single issue on which to hang his entire campaign for attorney general.

— Jim (the republican)
8:50 am May 13th, 2008

So, Jim, you are saying this was basically a “revenge” request since Harris has spoken about the issue on the campaign trail?

And who will pay that $10,000 for such blanket requests? Is it Blunt himself? What’s left of his campaign coffers? Surely you don’t think he expect John and Jane Q Public such as ourselves to pay for it with tax dollars?

— suzyjax
2:04 pm May 13th, 2008

I’ve got an idea why not just give Blunt the back-up tapes and than Blunt’s staff can go through it and copy what they want. What do a few back-up tapes cost?

— Stupid is as Stupid says!
3:55 pm May 13th, 2008